The dangerous farce now in the USA should end the argument and preclude the option of having an elected President of Australia in the future republic.
#auspol #AustralianRepublic
Recent searches
Search options
#australianrepublic
0 posts0 participants0 posts today
Australia (soon the last bastion of social democracy) is in a very good position to watch and learn from the ongoing political debacles around the globe. Watch and learn Australia. And be warned…
“Let Australia consider itself warned, that with the eventual arrival of republican government, a decision to elect the president by popular mandate would absolutely be the wrong outcome.
The V-Dem Institute’s report for 2024 shows that the shift to autocracy continues to be a dominant trend across the 200 countries covered by their researchers. The level of democracy enjoyed in 2023 has fallen to 1985-levels as an increasing number of autocratising countries impose limits on freedom of expression, manipulate elections and restrict the freedom of association.”
#auspol #DemocracyInDanger #AustralianRepublic #Presidentialism #Parliamentarianism
Source (read more)
@fixatedpersonsunit
Gawd… how hard can it be to renounce colonialism, build an equitable and equal society for all who live on this borrowed land while recognising First Nations sovereignty? F** the monarchy..
Parliament should be the ‘people’s house’, ALL of the people’s house. And in that house ‘truths’ should be heard and listened to.
The great Australian debate wasn’t so much a lost opportunity as a deliberate watering down of a great idea by those with vested interests in the current system and the most likely to lose something from the changes it could have brought about.
www.facebook.comIndependent AustraliaChair of the Real Republic Australia, David Muir, reflects on the “Con Con” that doomed the 1999 Republic Referendum.
#auspol #australia #KingCharlesIII #monachy #LidiaThorpe #AustralianRepublic
The Shot 
Jo Dyer writes about the bewildering pile-on following Lidia Thorpe’s loud / lone protest to King Charles.
The establishment claim it was grossly ‘disrespectful’ and didn’t cut through. But it did cut through, because the entire world heard it and reported on it.
So much gaslighting going on here and the double standards relating to the retribution she should face.
Let’s also not ignore the fact she wrote three ‘respectful’ letters to the Monarch prior to his visit requesting a meeting with him - all were ignored.
The truth is; what she did ‘cut through’ big time and she earned a lot of respect for standing on her principles. She made the rest of them look like arse kissing pompous suits with no real honour
https://theshot.net.au/uncategorized/this-is-what-truth-telling-looks-like/
@fixatedpersonsunit
So let me get this straight. The people who unsuccessfully fought against an invading colonial power and never surrendered must now pledge allegiance to the conquering royal house before any of them can represent their people in our ‘democracy’. Which is ‘capitulation’, ‘surrender’, and ‘validation’ of rhe colonial past (or present depending on your point of view), in effect abrogating all of their rights to the land they have been custodians of for thousands of years. How is this even permissible under international law?
#auspol #neoColonialism #AustralianRepublic #Parliament #Representation #Democracy
Replied in thread
@abcfeeds
Let theCourts decide whether a lawfully elected anti-monarchist member can sit in Parliament or not! The Parliamentary Oath is UNDEMOCRATIC.
Replied in thread
Her #moxy is bloody marvelous.
Nobody ever changed bullshit systems by asking politely. And, what's more Australian than telling a rich Englishman to fuck off?
Not my King!
Not my King!
Not my King!
#GirtGirtGirt
And Kerr was an example of a Governor General under (reportedly) heavy pressure @Old_IT_geek
No system is perfect. Removing a level of oversight is not likely to be an improvement.
It probably is time for a rewrite of our Constitution (it was compiled in the 19th century, after all) but just throwing bits out because we can't understand what they do is not at all wise.
@kentparkstreet1
Replied in thread
"I can’t see a good reason for it";
is advocating change on the basis of what you don't understand a rational position @kentparkstreet1 ? Name a nation without a Head of State. If you can't, then contemplate why. Before advocating change, make sure to comprehend what you're changing.
The Swiss and Australian models are products of our histories. Theirs is based largely on the US model, which the framers of our Constitution examined, then largely rejected.
The founders of the Commonwealth of Australia saw a need for oversight of the elected government. At the time, British Monarchy was an obvious choice (bearing in mind that Australia's Head of State is the Monarch, not the Governor General). That really hasn't worked very well since Menzies' day, but nobody's come up with a credible alternative.
Replied in thread
According to Google, there's no nation in the world that doesn't have a Head of State @kentparkstreet1
Do you reckon there might be a good reason for that?
Replied in thread
Inasmuch as it's written into our Constitution @kentparkstreet1 there is a "legal requirement". As for why, I reckon the US is an object lesson. Their Head of Government (President) serves as Head of State. How well that's working, I'll leave for you to contemplate.
For mine, I reckon we need something to scrutinise and if necessary foil our elected representatives. That's one of the putative roles of the Head of State. Involving the courts is an attractive idea, but the resultant politicisation is not.
The role of Governor General is not working as (apparently) envisaged by the framers of our Constitution. Would abolishing even that nominal oversight be an improvement?
If our Democracy was infallible, then it might be. That's a big IF!
Replied in thread
Involving the courts was your idea @kentparkstreet1
https://theblower.au/@kentparkstreet1@mastodon.online/113297176524244061
so you're in a better position to answer that than I.
You mentioned it in relation to Whitlam, so that's one. The GG also gives assent to legislation, so that's another.
https://peo.gov.au/understand-our-parliament/parliament-and-its-people/people-in-parliament/governor-general
Mastodon hosted on theblower.auThe BlowerDo you need to sort it out? Get on The Blower, a public social network site that's part of a global federation! Give it a go!
You don't have to be Australian to post here, but it helps.
Replied in thread
@kentparkstreet1
A nation needs a Head of State, if only for ceremonial purposes and to counterbalance the Head of Government. The US is an example of what happens when the Head of Government serves as Head of State.
We need a mechanism to deal with a misbehaving government. For me, that's the most important role of a Head of State. How can we do that, while guarding against outside interference (as, possibly, with the Whitlam dismissal)?
The only alternative I can see is the occasional revolution or coup d'etat. The question then becomes how to choose our Head of State.
Just saw on the news that some royal fuckwit from England is coming to visit. Really? It's just.... why? Does anyone still give a flying f*ck about some hereditary hat wearing bloke from the far side of the world? We are better than this colonial bootlicking. We have our own culture. Our own history. Our own ways of living and doing things. We don't need this shit.